tor 2006-01-19 klockan 09:17 +1100 skrev Anand Kumria: > > Are the below tcpdump's with or without the link-local address in > resolv.conf?
Yes, resolv.conf was untouched, and only contained the 192.* address. > Very strange! > > Just to confirm, in the second tcpdump there was *no* 169.254.0.0/16 > address in resolv.conf? Exactly. > > From the output it looks like 'host' just does a bind to the interface > and lets the kernel select the outgoing address. That's what I see too. > > Which means that zeroconf has to indicate to the kernel that it is only > to be used as a secondary address, or unless specifically required. Yes. As I showed you a few minutes ago, this selection seems to work as expected in at least *some* settings. Note that there probably are no 169.* addresses on this working uni network. Could that be the reason? The 169 address is chosen because there are 169.* peers? > > Thanks for your feedback so far, they should allow me to fix this > problem shortly. That's great! I look forward to testing it :-) /Mikael -- Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
